Letters to the Editor, Feb. 2

San Francisco Chronicle

February 1, 2017

Regarding “Robot serves at S.F. cafe” (Feb. 1): Count me as someone who finds the new “robot barista” preparing espresso coffee drinks at Cafe X in the Metreon very unappealing. In a city where people have their eyes on their smartphones more than on each other, and where driverless cars are making their way onto the streets, we ought to maintain the scant opportunities that still exist for human interaction. Hearing a “Good morning!” and “How can I help you?” from a real person at an early hour will help you start the day in a better mood.

Regarding “The fight begins in prime time” (Editorial, Feb. 1): Why should Senate Democrats fulfill their obligation to “advise and consent” on President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee when former President Barack Obama’s nominee was never given the same consideration by Republicans? Merrick Garland had the same kind of impeccable credentials as Neil Gorsuch and deserved a fair hearing.

And yet, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, furious that he had failed to make Obama a one-term president, employed false justifications for flat-out rejecting Garland. You can fully expect the GOP to change Senate rules if Democrats try to filibuster Trump’s nominee. This party, like the new president, bullies others to get its way. It is an ugly stain on the fabric of a fair and just political system.

Julian Grant, Pacifica

The real heroes

I believe that Steve Bannon is absolutely right when he says the media is the enemy. Sunlight, they say, is the ultimate disinfectant, and boy are we going to need a lot of that. As the gang in power prepares to loot the economy, abuse the Constitution, do away with civil rights and generally trample on everything this country stands for, the last thing they want is truths — real truths, not the “alternative” kind — to surface.

Journalists all over the country are asking the administration hard questions that make the perpetrators foam at the mouth, and I want to urge everyone to renew subscriptions, boost rating by watching news shows that question statements floated by the administration and generally make journalists feel like the heroes they can truly be.

Reporters this time around sound nothing like the ones we had during the former President Richard Nixon years: dispirited, manipulated and humiliated beyond belief. Our current ones can hold their heads up high. There is no such thing as alternative truth, and reporters are the thin line between us and disaster. We have never needed the Fourth Estate as much. Steve, thank you for pointing that out.

Tad Swida, Danville

Don’t play games

The Senate should confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court if he is found to be qualified. I understand that the Republicans refused to even consider Merrick Garland, former President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, even though Obama had 10 months left on his term.

I also understand that had Hillary Clinton become president, the Republicans indicated that no nominee of hers would be confirmed either. However, I disagree with playing the same game with Trump’s nomination of Neil Gorsuch. Once Gorsuch is fully vetted and found qualified, he should be confirmed without a filibuster and without resort to the nuclear option. That he is conservative should not be a disqualifying factor. Consider that Gorsuch was confirmed to the Court of Appeals by a unanimous vote in 2006.

The nuclear or constitutional option, by the way, is a parliamentary procedure that allows the U.S. Senate to override a rule or precedent by a simple majority of 51 votes, instead of by a supermajority of 60 votes. Remember, Trump was going to nominate a conservative and Gorsuch is a better choice than others he could have nominated.

And Gorsuch will bring the Supreme Court back to four conservatives, not a majority of five. More importantly, a less-than-full Supreme Court of nine justices impedes the smooth functioning of the court; the Supreme Court should not be a partisan institution. Perhaps, the Democrats should take the high road on this nomination; it will give them more credibility when they oppose clearly unqualified nominees like Betsy DeVos, Steve Bannon and Sen. Jeff Sessions.

Ralph Stone, San Francisco

Less liberty now

I feel that we should drape a black cloth over the Statue of Liberty or change the words to “Don’t give me your huddled masses.” The closing of our borders to certain countries is against everything our country stands for.

Susan Shand, Benicia

Filibuster instead

I disagree with The Chronicle editorial urging a hearing for President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. As an independent, I believe the Republicans should not be allowed to get away with the affront to the Constitution of refusing to consider former President Barack Obama’s nominee for a year. It is about defending the Constitution, not the quality of the individual nominated.

Appeasement does not work. Democrats should filibuster, for four years if necessary. Republicans will likely then eliminate the filibuster and good riddance. The Republicans are likely to eliminate the filibuster on laws anyway. As I point out in my book “Common Cents,” the filibuster flies in the face of the limited supermajorities in the Constitution and leads to gridlock. The Republicans will then pass good laws or mess up. If they mess up, Democrats will return to power and pass good laws or mess up. That is how it is supposed to work.

Paul Haughey, Sausalito

Franklin’s wisdom

Now is a good time to heed the following bit of wisdom from one of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin: “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”